Parshat Vayechi 5779-The white lie

In this week’s parsha there is a phenomenon which we find in a few places, reflecting the issue of the ‘white lie’. By definition, this is better described as being ‘economical with the truth’ rather than an outright lie, and we usually apply the ‘white ‘lie in a situation of diplomacy and tact, which requires careful handling of the facts to hand. The example in our parsha is the following:

a)

 וַיִּרְאוּ אֲחֵי-יוֹסֵף, כִּי-מֵת אֲבִיהֶם, וַיֹּאמְרוּ, לוּ יִשְׂטְמֵנוּ יוֹסֵף; וְהָשֵׁב יָשִׁיב, לָנוּ, אֵת כָּל-הָרָעָה, אֲשֶׁר גָּמַלְנוּ אֹתוֹ.

15 And when Joseph's brethren saw that their father was dead, they said: 'It may be that Joseph will hate us, and will fully requite us all the evil which we did unto him.'

טז  וַיְצַוּוּ, אֶל-יוֹסֵף לֵאמֹר:  אָבִיךָ צִוָּה, לִפְנֵי מוֹתוֹ לֵאמֹר.

16 And they sent a message unto Joseph, saying: 'Thy father did command before he died, saying:

יז  כֹּה-תֹאמְרוּ לְיוֹסֵף, אָנָּא שָׂא נָא פֶּשַׁע אַחֶיךָ וְחַטָּאתָם כִּי-רָעָה גְמָלוּךָ, וְעַתָּה שָׂא נָא, לְפֶשַׁע עַבְדֵי אֱלֹהֵי אָבִיךָ; וַיֵּבְךְּ יוֹסֵף, בְּדַבְּרָם אֵלָיו.

17 So shall ye say unto Joseph: Forgive, I pray thee now, the transgression of thy brethren, and their sin, for that they did unto thee evil. And now, we pray thee, forgive the tra

Rashi comments:

אביך צוה. שִׁנּוּ בַדָּבָר מִפְּנֵי הַשָּׁלוֹם, כִּי לֹא צִוָּה יַעֲקֹב כֵּן, שֶׁלֹּא נֶחֱשַׁד יוֹסֵף בְּעֵינָיו (בראשית רבה, יבמות ס"ה):

אביך צוה THY FATHER DID COMMAND — They altered the facts (they stated something that was false) for the sake of peace, for Jacob had given them no such command because Joseph was not suspect in his sight (Yevamot 65b)).

From here we see that although the conversation they refer to, never took place, the brothers felt that their lives were now in danger after Yaakov’s death, and the lie was justified, as Rashi says,’for the sake of peace’.

b) Another example is found in the Navi, in Sam 1 ch.16, describing the anointment of David by Shmuel. Shmuel is told by God to do this anointment and he is worried about Shaul’s reaction if he hears about it.

ב  וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁמוּאֵל אֵיךְ אֵלֵךְ, וְשָׁמַע שָׁאוּל וַהֲרָגָנִי; וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה, עֶגְלַת בָּקָר תִּקַּח בְּיָדֶךָ, וְאָמַרְתָּ, לִזְבֹּחַ לַיהוָה בָּאתִי.

2 And Samuel said: 'How can I go? if Saul hear it, he will kill me.' And the LORD said: 'Take a heifer with thee, and say: I am come to sacrifice to the LORD.

ג  וְקָרָאתָ לְיִשַׁי, בַּזָּבַח; וְאָנֹכִי, אוֹדִיעֲךָ אֵת אֲשֶׁר-תַּעֲשֶׂה, וּמָשַׁחְתָּ לִי, אֵת אֲשֶׁר-אֹמַר אֵלֶיךָ.

3 And call Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will tell thee what thou shalt do; and thou shalt anoint unto Me him whom I name unto thee.'

In this case, even God tells him to present a story to Shaul, which is not reflecting the truth but will be enough for Shaul not to become angry and possibly violent against Shmuel. Again we see the principle of allowing a ‘white’ lie to be told, to save any possible comebacks from Shaul against Shmuel(in this case being endorsed by God Himself).

c) An example in Talmud is found at the end of the famous story when Rabbi Gamliel is deposed from being the Chief Rabbi in his day. The Talmud relates the following:

Talmud Bavli Berachot 28a

‘The Gemara relates: On that day several benches were added to the study hall to accommodate the numerous students. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Abba Yosef ben Dostai and the Rabbis disputed this matter. One said: Four hundred benches were added to the study hall. And one said: Seven hundred benches were added to the study hall. When he saw the tremendous growth in the number of students, Rabban Gamliel was disheartened. He said: Perhaps, Heaven forbid, I prevented Israel from engaging in Torah study. They showed him in his dream white jugs filled with ashes alluding to the fact that the additional students were worthless idlers. The Gemara comments: That is not the case, but that dream was shown to him to ease his mind so that he would not feel bad.’

Again this is a message coming from God ,in the form of a dream, to Rabbi Gamliel, to placate him from feeling so depressed that he had denied access to the Bet Hamidrash to so many people.

In all the above cases it is clear that there is a clear reason for allowing the lie to go ahead, as in all cases there is a saving of character and even of life, when the lie is put forward in these episodes.

In 1994, on a visit to Israel I had the great pleasure of attending a shiur given by Nechama Liebowitz zal in her apartment (she was over 93 years old and as ‘sharp’ as  ever, even though she was very frail). In the shiur she was discussing the parameters of keeping away from ‘sheker’/lies and false statements. I asked her about the story in sefer Shmuel which I had just been teaching in a class in the UK. She stopped the shiur and went onto her mirpeset/balcony and came back a few minutes later with one of her typed sheets discussing the cases referred to above. Her conclusion was, as we have already mentioned, that there will be occasions when a ‘soft’ lie will be allowed, especially in the case of potential embarrassment, as we explained above. The great joy that she seemed to have when she answered my question showed me a great lesson as a teacher and, hopefully in menschlichkeit. Always show appreciation for a good question or observation and never dismiss a seemingly irrelevant question, but take it seriously. Nechama really clarified the whole issue that evening and it is a memory I will always treasure, to have been in the presence of one of the greatest Bible teachers and pedagogues of the 20th century.

I would just add that this same discussion pertains to the famous Talmudic discussion(Bet Hillel and Bet Shammai) as to what to say to the bride at the wedding (Ketubot 17a), and the same issues come up there as well. Each case has to be judged on its merits.

Rabbi Ian Shaffer        Cherry Hill NJ/SCW     Dec 2018